The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception [Hardcover]

Michael Baigent (Author), Richard Leigh (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: January 15, 1992

Investigates why the contents of the earliest biblical manuscripts, found forty years ago, are still being withheld from the general public and studies unpublished materials that provide some startling new views about the early Christians. 40,000 first printing.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

For the lay reader, this crystalline, well-documented work offers substantive evidence that for more than 40 years a small coterie of Catholic scholars established a stranglehold on access to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were discovered in the Qumran caves east of Jerusalem in 1947. Baigent and Leigh ( Holy Blood, Holy Grail ) claim that the elite group had direct links to official Vatican propaganda offices, that at least two among them were outspoken anti-Semites, and that they suppressed material that connects early Christianity to the Qumran community as well as to the zealous defenders of the fortress of Masada. Drawing on the findings of independent Dead Sea Scrolls scholar Robert Eisenman of California State University, the authors advance startling theories that should change the way we view ancient Judaism and nascent Christianity. They argue that the Essenes, Zealots and Nazorenes or early Christians in first-century Palestine weren't different Jewish sects but were, rather, various sobriquets for members of a broad messianic nationalistic movement dedicated to upholding the Law of Moses and determined to violently overthrow the Roman occupiers. The authors also amass evidence that the Habakkuk Commentary and other Dead Sea Scrolls refer to the same events as those recounted in Acts, in Josephus and in the works of early Christian historians; that Paul was sent forth by the hierarchy in Jerusalem for the express purpose of recruiting an army, and by preaching a new religion, he was depoliticizing and emasculating the militant movement; and that Paul might have been a Roman agent or informer. Baigent and Leigh demonstrate the perfidies of clandestine, cliquish scholarship that isn't accountable to the public and make urgent the forthwith publication and translation of all Scrolls material. Photos. BOMC and QPB selections.
Copyright 1991 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal

This emotional account of the events surrounding the discovery and translation of the scrolls attempts to uncover the theological and political efforts by individuals, governments, and religious institutions to keep controversial documents unpublished, ostensibly to preserve orthodox intepretations. The English authors, Baigent and Leigh, base their study on the work of Robert Eisenmen and other religious scholars who maintain that a conspiracy of consensus led to stagnant reinterpretation of old doctrine, rather than true research which would contest preconceived notions with newly discovered evidence. New theories by Eisenmen and others, which challenge the roots of Christianity as well as New Testament doctrine and history, are discussed. Standard works such as John M. Allegro's The Dead Sea Scrolls & the Christian Myth ( LJ 6/1/84), Roland De Vaux's Discoveries in the Judean Desert (Oxford Univ. Pr., 1977), and Geza Vermes's The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Viking, 1988. rev. ed.), and many others are preferable to this acrid introductory "expose."-- Paula I. Nielson, Loyola Marymount Univ. Lib., Los Angeles
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 268 pages
• Publisher: Simon & Schuster; 3rd edition (January 15, 1992)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0671734547
• ISBN-13: 978-0671734541
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.4 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (54 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,536,768 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

48 of 51 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The battle for the scrolls..., June 24, 2004

By 

FrKurt Messick "FrKurt Messick" (Bloomington, IN USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (TOP 500 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception (Hardcover)

This book, written in the early 1990s, had much more punch when it was first written. The Dead Sea Scrolls were still essentially under lock-and-key, accessible as a whole only to a few selected scholars who were selected by unclear and seemingly biased methods - that bias often being misconstrued as the dictates of the Roman Catholic Church. History has proven something rather different going on, but reading this book is still a good study of what can happen in even the most banal and esoteric of endeavours when secrecy and restricted access to information is the norm.

The Dead Sea Scrolls is a name given to a general collection of scrolls found in the area of Qumran, in the desert near the Dead Sea in the West Bank of the Jordan River. The first scrolls from this region were found in 1947/48. Many more scrolls have been found since then (and there may be some still missing, or hidden, by various regional authorities and antiquities dealers and collectors), including some in areas as far away as the British Museum (manuscripts collected from a Cairo genizah 50 years earlier were later found to match the scrolls).

Part of the politics of around the scrolls, which always featured into their saga, was that, while they were primary early Jewish texts (the Hebrew Bible, additional psalms, community writings of early sects of Judaism, etc.), the scrolls were found in what was then Arab territory by Arab traders and bedouins. The fragile state of Israeli/Palestinian/Jordanian politics always factored into the scrolls' fate; the scrolls came under control first of the Orthodox (Christian) leaders in East Jerusalem (then in Arab control), then later as scholars were sought under general Western academic supervision. It just so happened that many of the noted scholars in ancient Hebrew manuscripts (apart from Jewish scholars, who were prevented from participating) came from the ranks of the churches and seminaries, particularly the Roman Catholic Church.

This is where the seeds of mistrust and division were sown. For decades, the scrolls had to be reconstructed, as many of them were in fragmentary condition. Like a giant jigsaw puzzle with pieces missing, the pieces had to be reassembled as best they could be. This takes much longer than one might think - in the pre-computer days, without electronic assistance for cataloguing and matching, things had to be done manually, with cards, files, and photographs. It is true that many of the larger, in-tact scrolls were published early. But as time dragged on, it seemed somewhat as if there was a deliberate with-holding of information.

Baigent and Leigh trace the history of the scrolls and the history of the ideas of deception and restriction around the scrolls. Unfortunately, the issues are a bit overblown at times, to make the book more sensational. The feeling of 'they're hiding something' was certainly very real, and scholars, church leaders and the general public were clamouring for more access to the scrolls, if only to prove that there was not something vastly damaging to the church being hidden. Ideas were floated wildly speculating that there were writings that showed Jesus was never crucified, or somehow didn't die, that he had children and they continued a 'royal' line (it doesn't hurt to remember here that Baigent and Leigh co-authored the book, 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail', that attempted to trace the origins of the legends of the Holy Grail to the descendents of Jesus and his family). The idea was also given that the Roman Catholic scholars, at the instruction of the Vatican, were suppressing these damaging writings. This of course leaves aside the fact that there were non-catholics as part of the International Team, but that became problematic in and of itself, as the one avowed atheist, John Allegro, published scroll findings for which his published later had to issue retractions and apologies.

After the 1967 war, Jewish scholars gained access on a more equal footing with the European (mostly Christian) academics, but the general access was still restricted. Conspiracy theories grew.

Alas, history is sometimes far more mundane than one might hope - it wasn't vast conspiracies of keeping damaging texts hidden that was driving the restricted access, but largely academic politics and careerism of a rather common stamp (despite the fact that they were working with world-famous materials). When it became apparent that particular scholars (who were, along the way, assigned and given 'authority' over particular sub-sets of the scrolls) were keeping access so as to have first publication rights, and were treating these assignments as personal goods to be passed along to successors of their own choosing, this is when things really came to a head.

Complete copies of the scrolls had been made and deposited in other places around the world (given the general insecurity of the Middle East, which meant that a war could destroy them quite easily), but stringent security measures guarding access to these copies were put in place, and rigourous controls over who could use them meant that the scrolls were still hidden. However, the computer age made assembling large compendia of data fairly easy - such cataloguing of scrolls and scroll-bits was available, along with word and letter studies, and computers made it a task of weeks rather than decades to reconstruct the entire set of the scrolls. Once this was done, and then distributed (without permission), while the scroll team kicked up a fuss, the genie was out of the bottle, and the Huntington Library in California, one of the depositories of the copies, made them generally available. It is now more than 10 years after the scrolls have been freed, so some material is a little out of date.

Baigent and Leigh's work here gives the most sensational of conspiratorial leanings, while eventually coming down to the mundane side of things. They add an overview of the scrolls' content and interpretations, too, making this interesting both from the standpoint of the scrolls as well as history of the scroll battle.

30 of 33 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Good read, faulty sholarship, March 29, 2006

By 

Gourgen Oganessyan (Chicago, IL) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Dead Sea Scrolls Deception (Paperback)

The Dead Sea Scrolls deception is a typical Baigent & Leigh product: a fascinating intrigue-laced narrative that does not hold up to critical examination. Like their more famous Holy Blood, Holy Grail, its ultimate intent is to challenge the origins of Christianity and the legitimacy of the Catholic Church. While a worthwhile and noble task in and of itself, this is best accomplished thorough rationalistic scholarship, such as the one conducted by the members of the Jesus Seminar and scholars like Burton Mack, Robert Price, G.A Wells and Earl Doherty. But such works do not usually make for a thrilling read unless one has some background and a kin interest in the subject; they do not form good basis for best-selling novels of all time; and they do not lead to box-office busting Hollywood pictures. But using thinly-woven questionable arguments in the way Baigent always does ultimately defeat the purpose and ill serve the rationalist cause, while providing fundamentalists with a much-needed amo.

The book can be divided in two major parts: in the first, the authors provide a gripping tale of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at a site near Qumran and tell of the scandalous conduct of the so-called International Team ander the leadership of Father Roland De Vaux in the decades that followed. From this they conclude that the International Team operating in cahoots with the Catholic Church intentionally delayed, diluted and suppressed the research on the scrolls. This was because the information that was discovered in the "sectarian" portions of the collection was explosively embarassing to Christianity.

So far so good. The international team did in fact come under intense academic criticism more than once. They did delay the publication of the scrolls. Their conclusions on the nature of the scrolls were often biased and questionable at best. And the entire setup of the operation ensured that the Church had a tight control over what was being done and publicly released, which is never a good atmosphere in which to conduct objective research.

Now we come to the second half of the book. In it, Baigent and Leigh venture to reveal the content of the sectarian scrolls that was so embarassing to the Church. These ideas are drawn from the interpretation of the Scrolls by Professor Robert Eisenman. According to this view, what was embarassing was the fact that these documents date from 1st century CE, and not from 1st century BCE, as the international team claimed. The famous tales of the Damascus document and Habakkuk Comentary refer to events that occured immediately after the death of Jesus of Nazareth. The Teacher of Righteousness was actually James the Just. The Man of Lies was Paul of Tarsas - a Roman agent assigned to infiltrate the early Jerusalem Church and saw discord. That would also make the Wicked Priest a reference to the High Priest Ananas, who, according to a disputed passage in Josephus ordered the stoning of James the Just. Alternatively Wicked Priest could have been an alternate reference to Paul.

It is here that the authors run into a problem. They do not support their preference toward the Eisenman view by any data. They draw heavily on "historical" events described in the Acts of the Apostles, even though there is a broad agreement among scholars that Acts is a fictional document produced in the 2nd century CE by the Church eager to claim Paul for itself (in response to similar attempts by the Gnostic Marcion). Also, the authors commit the classic sin of conspiracy theorists and armchair detectives: failing to realize that not all of their arguments can be valid at the same time. This leads to broken logic that an astute reader will easily note, such as: the Qumran community were not Essenes since they do not conform to the description of Essenes by classical writers, and nowhere in the scrolls is the word Essene mentioned -- in the Scrolls, they call themselves Doers of the Law, "ossai", which can be transliterated in Greek as "Essene", therefore the Qumran people and the Essenes are the same thing, so the classical writers' description was wrong. Or, even better: Paul was present at the stoning of Stephen -- There was no such person as Stephen, it was a code name for James the Just -- Paul could not have been present at the stoning -- Paul orchestrated the stoning of James -- Paul got converted by the Qumran comunity lead by James because he was ridden with guilt for having stoned Stephen.

All these arguments now belong to history. Radiocarbon dating has firmly established the scrolls to be written or copied before 43 BCE - in accordance with the "international consensus", whether the team "fluked" it or not. What is curious is that in the first half of the book the authors tell about John Marco Allegro's heroic confrontation with the international team, setting up Roland de Vaux as the villain of the story (which he most probably was). They then go on and attack the straw man theory of the Wicked Priest being the Maccabean king Jonathan "or perhaps his brother Simon", referring to a view by some of the international team members. Never to they mention Allegro's own interpetation that the Wicked Priest was in fact Alexander Jannaeus, who persecuted dissenters (including possibly the Qumran group) that ended up in the infamous crusifixion of 800. They lambast the international team's "coin arguments" for the destructiion of Qumran in CE 68, and publish a nicely tabulated list of all coins found on the site, drawing attention to seemingly pronounced periods of activity circa CE 40 and later circa CE 130 during the bar Kochba revolt. Never do they talk about the fact that the list clearly shows the largest chunk of coins found to date in the period BCE 103 - 76, exactly coiciding with the rule of Jannaeus! In fact, external and internal evidence clearly shows that of all historical fugures that we know no one fits the role of the Wicked Priest as well as Jannaeus.

The authors also provide a striking example of "do as I say, not as I do". They blast De Vaux's team for ignoring parts of the scrolls that did not fit their theory, for making unsupported wishful statements and unjustified assumptions. But what of Baigent's and Leigh's own conduct? How does the "seekers after smooth things" incident fit the James the Just theory? Or how do the descriptions of the Wicked Priest, "walking in the ways of drunkedness", "ruled Israel", "afflicted by a stroke" fit the theory? What basis do they have for cathegorical statements like "James certainly knew Jesus personally, whether he was his blood brother or not (although he most probably was)"? Most probably??? Or, "It is not clear if this Luke (the author of the Gospel and the Acts - GO) is the same friend mentioned by Paul as the "beloved physician Luke" (many scholars think he is)". What many scholars??? Absolute majority of scholars have concluded that Luke mentioned by Paul simply could not have written the Gospel.

Surely the International Team did a lousy job with the scrolls in retrospect, intentionally or not. Surely the Church played a role. And surely, the sectarian scrolls can be interpreted in ways that are embarassing to the Church. Allegro's theory is embarassing. It shows that currents of apocalyptic messianism existed within Judaism well before the advent of Christianity. It shows possible origins of the crusufixion myths dating well before the 1st century CE, providing fertile ground for mystics such as Paul to preach a mythical cosmic Christ, and leading later generations to invent a fictional Gospel biography of this savior god. A familiar ringing story depriving Jesus of uniqueness and quite possibly of historical existence is embarassing enough.

32 of 37 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars an exciting tale, June 8, 2002

By 

B. Falk "eoi" (Los Angeles, CA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception (Hardcover)

Hidden for nineteen centuries, the Dead Sea Scrolls-the earliest biblical manuscripts-were found in caves near Jerusalem more than forty years ago. Yet the content of a large part of the eight hundred ancient
Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts remains concealed from the general public.

In this remarkable book Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, authors of the best-seller Holy Blood, Holy Grail, reveal new material that places the Scrolls in the time of Jesus and offers nothing less than a new
account of Christianity and an alternative and highly significant version of much of the New Testament.

Working closely with Professor Robert Eisenman-one of the foremost experts in biblical archaeology and scholarship-and with other scholars in both America and Britain, Baigent and Leigh set out to discover
why the content of the Scrolls was kept secret for so long. Their investigation began in Israel, led to the corridors of the Vatican, and into the offices of the Inquisition. They encountered a rigidly held
"consensus" on interpretation and dating, and discovered just how fiercely orthodox biblical scholarship was prepared to fight to retain its monopoly on the materials and their interpretation.

But The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception is much more than an expose of a bitter struggle among scholars. Extensive interviews, historical analysis, and a close study of both published and unpublished materials led
Baigent and Leigh to startling new views about the early Christians-for the Scrolls identify the group known as Christians as a band of fervent theocratic revolutionaries intent on breaking- Roman control of the
Holy Land and restoring the kingdom of Israel to its rightful Judaic dynasty, of which Jesus himself was a member.

The Dead Sea Scrolls have been news since their discovery, and with the release of the Scrolls themselves by the Huntington Library, they are on front pages and in prime time all over America. This remarkable
book tells the story of a great archaeological find and the mysteries surrounding it.